>At 08:46 AM 9/26/2001 -0700, Barry Schwartz wrote:
>Sorry, no flame intended, but. . .I
None taken. Heck, I don't even have carbs on my Triumph so what do I know? ;{)
I agree that the vacuum retard was introduced as an emissions control
device and that merely retarding the timing a couple of degrees can improve
emissions.
My (possibly incorrect or incomplete) assumption was that a smooth idle
produces cleaner emissions than a sputtering idle with varying RPM.
I guess the deciding question might be: Does the vacuum retard unit merely
act like an on/off switch to kick in a few extra degrees at idle, or, when
it is active (at idle) is the amount of retard proportional to the vacuum
signal? If it is proportional to the vacuum signal then it WILL stabilize
the idle RPMs and if two cars have the same _average_ idle but one varies
+/- 50 RPM and the other varies +/- 5 RPM wouldn't the second engine be
cleaner?
-Erik
--
Erik Quackenbush, V.P. Operations, Midwest Filter Corporation
1-847-680-0566 fax: 1-847-680-0832 http://www.midwestfilter.com
/// triumphs@autox.team.net mailing list
/// To unsubscribe send a plain text message to majordomo@autox.team.net
/// with nothing in it but
///
/// unsubscribe triumphs
///
/// or try http://www.team.net/cgi-bin/majorcool
|